Re: *.mid vs *.midi

[immanuel litzroth]

Haskell does not "deduce" what to include. You have to explicitly import each 
module or no magic happens. Can't really see the big difference with #include 
"stdio.h" and import Unix. The point is I believe that you are guaranteed that 
what is linked is is is compatible with your declarations, though I'd have to 
look this up.
C & C++ of course offer no such guarantees.
Immanuel

Quoting Hans Aberg <address@hidden>:

> On 17 May 2008, at 22:15, Karl Hammar wrote:
> 
> > A startup file would be about the same as an initial \include.
> 
> Perhaps it is not needed in a compiler.
> 
> > I would be nice to be able to do like
> >
> >   lilypond a.ly .. o.ly z.ly
> >
> > i.e. treat a.ly .. o.ly as if they where included in z.ly,
> without
> > having to say so in z.ly.
> 
> This would walk down the path of C-like compilers.
> 
> Have you checked out Haskell <http://haskell.org/> and the compiler
>  
> GHC? - Haskell has a module system, which makes it possible for GHC
>  
> to compile by
>    ghc --make a.hs
> where "a.hs" is a file containing a "main" function. By the module 
> 
> system, it is possible to deduce what files to include. One then
> only  
> needs to set the library paths somewhere.
> 
> Convenient, though perhaps far from current Lilypond.
> 
>    Hans
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Free pop3 email with a spam filter.
http://www.bluebottle.com/tag/5